QUESTION

 A) a Supreme Court case of your choosing, in which you provide: 1) a brief summary of the particular case in question, as well as the Constitutional question involved (What constitutional issue needed to be cleared up by the court?) 2) a brief background of the Court’s previous rulings in this issue area 3) how you think the case should be/should have been decided, based on Constitutional precedent and/or interpretation (not simply your gut feeling!)

ANSWER

Abstract

2
Using race as a sole criterion for admission was ruled to violate the Equal Protection
Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in the
Supreme Court case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, which was decided in
1978. When Bakke applied for medical school at the University of California Davis, he was a
white guy. Despite his admissions score is above average and the school having available spots
when he applied, the institution's racial quota system prevented him from being accepted
because of his race. The school previously had a quota system where white candidates could
only compete for 84 of the 100 slots, while the other 16 were designated for ethnic minorities.

Based on a clear-cut racial quota system, Bakke sued the school, saying it was illegal and
violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Court ruled that the Equal Protection Clause and the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 were violated by these admission standards. Equal Protection Clause
violations are discrimination prohibited under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, according to the
Supreme Court's synthesis of the two analyses A government must have a compelling interest
with narrowly restricted methods to base its actions on race alone, as required by the Equal
Protection Clause, for which the Court imposed severe scrutiny in this instance.

Minorities have been underrepresented in the medical field for a long time, and the
diversity in the classroom allowed for a better interchange of ideas. However, the Supreme
Court rejected the University's claims, ruling that there are alternative methods to ensure
representation of historically disadvantaged groups and classroom diversity without a blatant
racial quota system. According to the Supreme Court, the race was one of several factors in
admissions. But the Supreme Court concluded that a quota system that eliminates applicants
based solely on their color constitutes racial discrimination and that the University did not have
a compelling purpose with properly limited procedures to pass the severe scrutiny test of the
First Amendment.

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)

Case Summary

The Supreme Court of the United States handed down one of the most significant
decisions in the country's history in 1954. In the 1954 decision of Brown v. Board of
Education, it was determined that racial segregation in public schools in the United States
was unconstitutional. It meant that no public school may discriminate against pupils based on
their race under the law and that individuals of all races were free to attend the schools of
their choosing under the same conditions. This decision occurred when black students were
restricted to attending schools exclusively for African Americans, and white students were
restricted to attending schools exclusively for white students. Immediately after the decision,
the American public saw it as a prelude to greater things to come.

In reality, this decision had a crucial role in establishing the Civil Rights Movement
and the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, among other things (Gamson & Modigliani,
1994). It was clear that, despite the efforts made to close the gap between discrimination and
segregation in American society, the roots of prejudice remained in the educational sector.
Earlier this year, in Green v. County School Board, the United States Supreme Court
addressed the subject of racial segregation in schools, concluding that although it was
difficult to abolish racial discrimination completely, state governments had a duty to work
toward desegregating schools (Chang, 2002).

Allan Bakke, 35-year-old white man, had applied to a dozen medical schools between
1972 and 1978. (Bell, 1979). They turned him away from all of them because they thought he
was too old to be enrolled in medical school. When he applied to medical schools at the time,
he was anticipated to get accepted, given his high GPA levels. The University of California,
Davis, as well as the other medical schools, refused to accept him for enrollment. The

3
University of California ended up suing him because it had previously indicated that it would
admit him, but altered its mind at the last minute. In court, Bakke argued that minority
communities were given top priority in admissions that whites like him. Bakke also argued
that universities shad set aside specific numbers of minority seats that would go to minorities
regardless of their qualifications (Bell, 1979). In its decision, the supreme court held that
racial quotas in college admission applications violated the Equal Protection Clause. Under
this clause, as outlined in the Fourteenth Amendment, "No state should deny to any person
within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Although this supreme court decision
eliminated racial quotas in college admissions, it allowed race to be one of the many
admission factors colleges could emulate to achieve diversity in students.

Background

When affirmative action was introduced in 1961, it was considered the ideal tool to
promote integration and eliminate discriminatory practices in public institutions (Gamson &
Modigliani, 1994). Institutions were expected to refrain from considering a person's race
while making judgments about employment and other relevant possibilities. Consequently,
schools, colleges, and universities implemented quota systems that ensured that persons of
color were admitted as well to promote diversity and eliminate discriminatory practices in the
United States.

Colleges and universities in the United States have made steps to increase the
diversity of their student body. As a result, educational institutions in the United States
established racial quotas to ensure that all segments of society in the country were fairly
represented. This was done to help pupils of color, such as African Americans, get into the
schools for which they were most suited. Colleges and universities were clearly in violation
of the Eighth Amendment at the time of this ruling (Arthur & Shapiro, 2021). Even if their

4
documents were readable, whites, the country's largest ethnic group, were sometimes refused
entry to prestigious universities. Equal representation for other communities was the rationale
for this action. If Bakke had achieved high GPA results in this situation, he would have been
eligible to attend universities such as the University of California. However, university
admissions committees rejected his application because of his race and age. Bakke's age was
recognized as a disqualifying factor by all of the colleges he applied to (Bell, 1979).

According to one of the judges, institutions may encourage diversity by ensuring that
students eager to work in minority populations are enrolled. Over the last several decades,
colleges have embraced the concept of enrolling persons who are publicly supportive of
minority populations (Epstein & Knight, 2000). Diversity of thinking and acceptance of
minority viewpoints among college students is increasing. Students like Bakke were allegedly
subjected to unfair treatment by university and college programs that reserved a particular
number of seats for underrepresented groups. Discrimination in admissions due to race was
thereby reduced, if not eliminated.

According to the court's judgment here, colleges and universities may utilize race to
consider their admissions decisions. Those from minority groups who have long thought that
the system benefited pupils from particular ethnicities saw this as a huge victory. Colleges
were told to develop new ways to attract students from underrepresented groups. Colleges
have implemented or redesigned initiatives such as awarding admission to students based on
their participation in sports. For example, African-Americans who excelled in sports like
basketball received scholarships to pursue their academic goals while still participating in
their favorite pastimes (Baldwin, 2009). Colleges' admission policies also assured those
students who were accepted based on merit rather than social status.

5
The system that was in existence before the decision, in this case, allowed a
disproportionately high number of enrollment opportunities for minorities. People of color,
Latinos, and Asians would have fewer opportunities to attend college if quotas set by college
and university boards were followed. Following the decision, in this case, universities and
colleges may now accept students based only on their credentials rather than their race
(Baldwin, 2009). The majority of the ruling's beneficiaries were students from underserved
areas of the country. Despite the attempts to combat educational inequality, kids in these
cities were often left out when the time came to attend college. Many African-Americans in
inner cities were encouraged by the Supreme Court decision to apply to schools and
universities based on their merit, not only because they were black (Baldwin, 2009). Because
of racial quotas imposed by institutions, minority students had to study harder before the
Supreme Court made its ruling. There were fewer students of color accepted despite their
efforts in the classroom. New norms were established for this group of individuals, and they
were promised that they might be assessed based on competence rather than race.

How the case would have been handled

Discrimination against any individual is prohibited under the United States of
America (Posner, 1979). Most white Americans were relieved by the Supreme Court's
decision, who had been denied chances despite their credentials for the sake of diversity.
Second, the court's judgment helped further American values of equality and inclusion in part
(Epstein & Knight, 2000). To ensure that minorities of color had an equal shot at success, UC
had contended throughout the court proceedings that the use of racial quotas was critical to
achieving equity. At the University of California, it was specifically mentioned how
important it was to guarantee that African-American communities had access to physicians of

6
their ancestry. This argument shows the belief that African American communities only
desire physicians who belong to their racial group.

To a degree, the court's judgment didn't address how universities and colleges should
deal with the issue of prejudice in the admissions process. A lot of responsibility for deciding
who to accept and how to foster a diverse campus fell on schools like the University of
California, Davis. As a result, universities developed a system of reverse discrimination,
allowing them to choose the students who would be admitted. To be clear, the court's
judgment made it clear that race might be utilized to determine a student's suitability for
enrollment in a certain institution. New admissions proxies were adopted by universities and
colleges that were seen as discriminatory. Occasionally, schools would refuse to admit white
applicants with GPAs and socioeconomic backgrounds almost equal to African American
applicants.

While the option of analyzing a person's family history was included to promote
diversity and inclusiveness in college, it resulted in a large number of white students being
barred from participating in the application process (Chang, 2005). All individuals shut out
had identical credentials, but the most important aspect was the color of their skin and a
desire to bring diversity to college campuses. As a result of the Supreme Court's ruling, in
this case, schools and universities around the nation were forced to reconsider their policies.
The University of Michigan, for example, switched to a 150-point system after years of
utilizing an admissions grid. It used to be that admissions decisions at colleges and
universities were solely based on a student's grade point average (Synnott, 2004). It was
decided that the new system would consider various characteristics, such as race, educational
background, extracurricular activities, and the economic and social position of the family.
Including race as a consideration in the decision was seen by many as a reminder that the

7
racial relations between white Americans and minority groups were still a long way from
equal.

As a result of the Supreme Court's judgment, in this case, the number of African
American students attending institutions throughout the country dropped. As a result of the
decision, the number of African-American students in higher education climbed to over 1.1
million, an increase of 10%. As a result, the number of African American students attending
college decreased in subsequent years. Due to a fear of being sued for reverse discrimination,
fewer African American students were accepted to schools and universities (Post, 1996).
Minority students would be perceived as having fewer chances if admissions went up.

Conclusion

University of California v. Bakke was a major Supreme Court decision in 1978 that
established that colleges and universities might utilize race as one of the elements in their
admissions policies to promote diversity. When Bakke first applied to the University of
California Davis medical school, he was a white guy in his 30s who had previously been
refused and had tried again. One school turned in his application because they felt he was too
old for medical school, even though he had higher grades. As a consequence of the court's
decision, the University of California at Davis accepted Bakke as an undergraduate student.
The court's ruling has far-reaching ramifications for the United States of America. The
verdict had a favorable impact on race relations in the United States, particularly among
whites and people of color. While most students were white, they had been discriminated
against throughout the admissions process for various learning institutions. As a result of the
decision, students were selected for enrollment and admission based on their abilities and
qualifications.